Ireland Israel Alliance (IIA) and UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) have made a joint written submission to the Irish Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee claiming that a new Bill proposed by the Irish government would contravene EU and WTO rules.

Alan Shatter, former Minister of Justice, and Natasha Hausdorff will represent IIA and UKLFI at a public session of the Committee on 15 July 2025.

The new Bill would ban imports into Ireland of goods originating in specified areas of Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem. It is intended by the Irish government to replace a private member’s Bill introduced in the Irish Senate in 2018, which the then Irish Attorney General advised was contrary to EU law.

The full name of the previous Bill was “Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill” and it was commonly referred to as the “Occupied Territories Bill” or “OTB”. The full name of the new Bill is “Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill, and it has been given the acronym “PIGs Bill”.

IIA and UKLFI submit that the new PIGs Bill would also contravene EU law, which allocates exclusive competence for foreign trade policy to the EU. EU member states are precluded from acting unilaterally.

The Irish government has argued that these EU rules are overridden by international law. It claims that Ireland is required by international law to ban imports of goods from areas of Israeli settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in accordance with the advisory opinion given by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on 19 July 2024.

However, IIA and UKLFI say that the ICJ’s majority advisory opinion does not alter the fact that it is for the EU to decide on any measures of foreign policy that may be required by international law, not for individual member states. In any case, they point out that the ICJ’s majority opinion is not binding and is based on inaccurate information. Furthermore, the opinion does not advise that a State must ban or may ban the import of goods from specified areas of East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

The Irish government also claims that the ban is permitted under an exception for “public policy” (or “order public” and similar terms in other equally authentic texts). However, the EU’s Court of Justice has interpreted this term as requiring a “genuine and sufficiently serious threat to the requirements of public policy affecting one of the fundamental interests of society”. IIA and UKLFI observe that it cannot realistically be claimed that the import into Ireland of goods originating in parts of the West Bank constitutes such a threat.

IIA and UKLFI add that the PIGs Bill would also infringe other provisions of EU law, including the prohibition of restrictions on imports from other EU member states and from the UK, as well as provisions relating to the EU’s external policy.

Finally, IIA and UKLFI discuss the prohibition of restrictions on imports and the most favoured nation (“MFN”) requirement under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (“the GATT”). The only potentially relevant exception appears to be for measures “necessary to protect public morals”. However, there is no evidence that an import ban as proposed by the PIGs Bill is “necessary to protect public morals”.

Even if it overcomes this hurdle, the Irish legislation would still be disqualified from benefiting from the exemption because it would be discriminatory: it would only apply to goods from territory occupied by Israel and would not restrict imports from Western Sahara or Northern Cyprus, which are illegally occupied by powers that have encouraged many of their own population to settle there.

Jonathan Turner, Chief Executive of UKLFI, said:

“If the PIGs Bill is enacted, its illegality could be raised in various different legal proceedings. In those proceedings, evidence could be given that its adoption was in reality driven by widespread antisemitism in Ireland, rather than a genuine threat affecting a fundamental interest of society or a need to protect Irish morals. The factual basis of the ICJ’s non-binding, majority advisory opinion, and even the impartiality of some of its judges, might also be impugned.”

Jackie Goodall, Executive Director of IIA said:

“Official Ireland is heading in a very dangerous direction due to its obsession with enacting a discriminatory, antisemitic and illegal boycott bill. I am therefore delighted that Alan Shatter and Natasha Hausdorff will represent the Ireland Israel Alliance in what is sure to be a powerful presentation. We remain hopeful that the proposed bill and all its iterations will finally be consigned to the dustbin of history, where it belongs.”

The written submission can be viewed HERE